6b18 build problems

[Matthias Klose]

On 21.02.2010 01:49, Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>> it looks like the build now requires the replaceregexp task, which at least
>> in Debian is in the ant-optional package. However the exit code of ant
       ^^^^^^

>> -diagnostics doesn't change with this package installed.
>>
>
> Yes, the replaceregexp task has been needed for a while for 7.  It's
> to do with the change to drop-in tarballs for JAXP and JAXWS.
>
> I've not got a system with such a new Ant yet (is this some unstable
> Ubuntu you're testing on?) so not currently in a situation to see this
> bug.

see above.

>
>>>>   - cacao build failure when configured with
>>>>      --with-openjdk=/usr/lib/jvm/java-6-openjdk
>>>>      --with-hotspot-build=original
>>>>      --with-additional-vms=cacao
>>>>    works with a two stage build using gcj.
>>>>
>>>
>>> --with-cacao was broken until yesterday due to one of the patches.  I
>>> haven't seen this failure and it's odd if it only occurs when using
>>> --with-openjdk and not a full build.  Why would java.nio.ByteBuffer be
>>> missing?  It's even in GCJ.
>>
>> the build did include these changes.
>>
>
> What changes?

tip of IcedTea6

> It does make some bootstrapping changes because these
> are necessary with the JAXP and JAXWS sources vanishing.  I don't see
> how this would affect ByteBuffer and certainly not on an OpenJDK build
> which doesn't need the bootstrapping anyway.
>
> I'll have a look when I'm back at work on Monday.
>
>>>>    details:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://launchpadlibrarian.net/39430688/buildlog_ubuntu-lucid-armel.openjdk-6_6b18~pre1-0ubuntu1_FAILEDTOBUILD.txt.gz
>>>>
>>>>   - make jtregcheck starts rebuilding the whole openjdk again. apparently
>>>>    an out of date stamp, or a missing stamp. still searching for this one.
>>>>    any ideas?
>>>
>>> No, other than make sure you're using the latest HEAD as I did fix a
>>> few issues yesterday.
>>
>> no, didn't fix. Mark (W.), is this seen on the buildd's as well, when
>> running make&&  make check?
>>
>
> If you're referring to Mark's builds on the icedtea.classpath.org
> servers, they don't seem to be getting as far as make check for some
> reason I can't yet fathom.

yes, I can't this failure as well.

> We have automated tests going on a box inside Red Hat   I haven't yet
> checked that in detail yet to see if it is repeating part of the
> build.  Probably some dead Makefile target.  I think it's probably
> worth documenting the current targets somewhere and nuking any that
> are unused/unneeded and more importantly not well-maintained.
>
> This is just thoughts off the top of my head; I'll look into the
> issues on Monday.

cool, thanks!

   Matthias